D&D General If the king has no children could he name his wives cousin, whose young enough to be her son, as heir to the throne?, after all he's only a in law

JMISBEST

Explorer
I've had a thought about something that could in the world my group will soon be campaign in but if it does happen it will be years after the campaign ends

My question is if the king, whose currently only the crown prince, has no children could he name his wives cousin, whose young enough to be his wives son, but not young enough to be his son, but despite that he's always treated him like the son he never had, as heir to the throne?, after all even though he is a member of the royal family he's only related to the king by marriage not by blood or even by adoption?

If it helps The Kings Cousin by marriage/his wives cousin, whose young enough to be his wives son, but not young enough to be his son, but that despite that he's always treated like the son he never had, is also the nephew of A Duke and by various marriage's he's related to 4 Barons, 2 Baroness's and 1 Earl. Does that make a difference?
 

log in or register to remove this ad




Snarf Zagyg

Notorious Liquefactionist
Maybe the King changes the succession order to agnatic seniority.

The King does what the King wants.

1653531248702.gif
 

Ixal

Adventurer
Not sure if there is any point in responding, but I do it one more time.

1. It depends on the local customs.
2. If there are any other people who, by custom, should inherit first.
3. If the other nobles are on board with it.
Joker: If the king is powerful and influential enough to silence all opposition.

Basically the king choosing his successor, either during his lifetime or through his will is not that unusual. Only if it is followed once he is dead is a different question.
 


pukunui

Legend
I've had a thought about something that could in the world my group will soon be campaign in but if it does happen it will be years after the campaign ends
You're thinking about stuff that could happen after the end of a campaign that hasn't even begun yet? For all you know, your character will die during the campaign, rendering any epilogue you come up with moot. Or something else might come up during the course of the campaign that changes your character's path, again rendering any epilogue you prepare in advance moot.

Have you considered writing a novel about these characters instead of playing them in an RPG campaign?
 


MGibster

Legend
The thing with a hereditary kingdom is that you can really upset the balance when there's a question of who the heir is. So, sure, the king could simply declare that niece or nephew is now the heir. Will the rest of the kingdom accept that? What if someone else has a stronger claim to the throne as they are a direct descendant of a former monarch? What if there are factions who would see a different heir ascend the throne as part of their own bid for power? There's all sorts of things you could do with this situation.
 

Have you considered writing a novel about these characters instead of playing them in an RPG campaign?
Do you want a novel in his style of writing.

The Crown Prince who was soon to be King, thought his cousin, who was not young enough to be his son, was like the son he never had.
But it helped the King who was currently Crown prince's cousin, who was not young enough to be his son, but was still like the son he never had, still had noble blood.

A style of writing JM has stated he invented out of boredom when he was younger and has used for years anyway.
 
Last edited:


Raduin711

Adventurer
As far as I can tell, the crown (the entity, rather than the object) is really just a fancy name for the royal will. On that will is ownership of the kingdom itself. Which means, in theory, the crown can go to whomever the current holder wants.

The only caveat here is that property rights have to be backed up with threat of violence. If there isn't anyone around to back up your claim then you don't own the thing, no matter who you are or what it is. So it is only through the allegiance of the nobility who hold the reins of the military that the king is able to own the kingdom.

Rules of Succession are kind of a promise by the King that the crown will be passed down following a certain pattern. Your rules of succession may be different than modern England's. There is no "one" way of doing it. But if the recipient of the crown is unpopular enough with the nobility, whether the rules of succession are being followed may be a moot point... Because it's the nobles with their capacity for violence that backs up claims to ownership, not the crown. If there is a disagreement between the nobles who should rule, then you end up with something like the War of the Roses.

But I am not an expert so take this with a grain of salt.
 

JMISBEST

Explorer
Do you want a novel in his style of writing.

The Crown Prince who was soon to be King, thought his cousin, who was not young enough to be his son, was like the son he never had.
But it helped the King who was currently Crown prince, cousin, who was not young enough to be his son, was like the son he never had, still had noble blood.

A style of writing JM has stated he invented out of boredom when he was younger and has used for years anyway.
I've just remember something. In The Future Kings Country you can't have sex before your 18, but in his wives homeland you can have sex at 16, meaning that in his homeland he isn't old enough to be his cousin in laws father but in his wives homeland he is old enough to be his cousin in laws father
 

gamerprinter

Mapper/Publisher
Cannot say much about royal inheritance in a European styled setting, but in Japan, a given lord, whether a daimyo, samurai lord or shogun merely needs to adopt his chosen replacement, to take office upon his death. The title of shogun was conferred unto Minamoto Yoritomo by the emperor. All subsequent shogun houses had to be a Minamoto in order to take title, up to and including Tokugawa Ieyasu, except Ieyasu had to be adopted into the Minamoto line, who had long not been the active shogun, though still carrying the bloodline exclusive to shogun status, so he had to find a living heir and be adopted by that person to gain the title. But this same process occurred across the bureacracy of Japan. You needn't marry into a family, nor be an actual descendant, you just need to be legally adopted and you qualify.

Now imperial inheritance is more like Europe being father to eldest son, normally. However, one emperor only had daughters, and his eldest daughter was married to her chosen husband, who had to be adopted by the emperor to gain title, but still required marrying the emperor's daughter to hold title. Sometime in 6th century of Japan, Suiko was the only daughter of the emperor, and was married to the new emperor, however, he died only a few short years later, and Suiko opted not to remarry and gained the title Mikado or emperor, and was the first ruling female emperor of Japan - one of three, though the title "empress" doesn't exist.

In Celtic society, you have tannistry, which meant that the ablest member of the clan is it's clan leader and voted by the rest of the clan into the position, but it isn't a lifetime position, at any point if the majority of the clan feels the clan leader (and could be a king), should be replaced by vote. they are. However, if the king/clan leader dies, then the next in line is the next ablest member of the clan. Which could be the king's son, but just as likely his brother or sister, or cousin, or nephew or niece. So whoever is the best candidate is replaced, though the king's family name still holds title, it just isn't automatically your eldest son, like it is in non Celtic Europe.
 
Last edited:


There are plenty of historical examples of the English crown passing to distant cousins (or occasionally people who are not related at all, eyeballing no Henry Tudors in particular). But the authority of a monarch drops to zero after they are dead, so who they chose doesn't carry a lot of weight.

What matters is who the nobles are willing to support. Inconvenient inheritance laws can be ignored or changed.

For example, Henry VIII legally declared his daughters Mary and Elizabeth illegitimate, thus completely ruling them out of the line of succession. His son Edward VI tried to appoint his cousin Jane Grey as his successor, but more nobles backed Mary so she became queen when Edward died, despite the law and the previous two monarchs saying she couldn't. And she was succeeded by also illegal Elizabeth.

It didn't end well for Jane Grey.
 
Last edited:

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Do you want a novel in his style of writing.

The Crown Prince who was soon to be King, thought his cousin, who was not young enough to be his son, was like the son he never had.
But it helped the King who was currently Crown prince's cousin, who was not young enough to be his son, but was still like the son he never had, still had noble blood.

A style of writing JM has stated he invented out of boredom when he was younger and has used for years anyway.
Needs more Unnecessarily Capitalized Words.
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Not personally, no. Then again, I maintain these posts are all some kind of elaborate joke or performance art or something. I was just sort of playing along.
Many of us thought the same of le Redoutable (you know, the “sorry for using so much bandwidth” guy) on the WotC forums back in the day. He turned out to be 100% earnest.
 

Ondath

Adventurer
Many of us thought the same of le Redoutable (you know, the “sorry for using so much bandwidth” guy) on the WotC forums back in the day. He turned out to be 100% earnest.
I believe he still posts his solo threads every now and then. Honestly I'm a bit surprised self-replying to keep a thread going like that is allowed.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top